I am grateful for your interest.
The issue is conflicting requirements:
1 - same package for Squeak and Pharo.
2 - X509 support is spurious but RSA depends on ASN.1 support
3 - Pharo [and Squeak!] both have hash functions and DigitalSecureAlgorithm
that may get overwritten, leading to...
4 - Both Squeak and Pharo should have a common basis of crypto in both minimal
images.
5 - Bootstrap loads a separately repositoried [in SmalltalkHub] Cryptography
fork version 50, from version 36 common. Andso...
6 - we need a) common basic loaded, common support, b) common crypto-full
loadable by Squeak, Pharo [and Bootstrap!] and c) removal of Undeclared.
I think this sums up our situation. Would others be willing to commit to make
these basis changes, in both Squeak and Pharo?
Thank you,
Henry
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 12:55, Stephane Ducasse
<[stepharo.s...@gmail.com]("mailto:stepharo.s...@gmail.com";)> wrote:
> I would like the package to be working for Pharo. Now from your description I
> have problem to really understand the situation. I think that Pharo core
> should have minimum and packages should be able to be loaded nicely on top. >
> Currently, SHA1, SHA256 and MD5 all get redefined by Cryptography-zzz.111.mcz
> loading. Do you mean that the version in Pharo are older than the one in 111?
> Stef On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 6:17 PM, henry wrote: > I am curious as to
> integration of the newest Cryptography package there into > Pharo. There are
> two Undeclared: SoundRecorder and FillInTheBlank, though I > do not know if
> such would be a part of a Pharo-Squeak compatibility layer. > > More
> pertinent would be what to do with the HashFunctions that already > reside in
> the Pharo image. If the decision was to include the entire > Cryptography
> into base, then making the HashFunctions not go Obselete would > be the
> objective. > > Currently, SHA1, SHA256 and MD5 all get redefined by >
> Cryptography-zzz.111.mcz loading. > > What do you think about bringing
> Cryptography up to date for Pharo and what > would be needed. It would help
> to seek common ground between Squeak and > Pharo, yes? > > > - HH > >
> @callistohouse.club>
